Funny how Hitlery was cracking wise about Trump complaining about his mic during their debate...
Anyone who complains about the microphone is not having a good night.
IS THAT SO?
Hmmmmmm...
Presidential Debate Commission Admits Trumps Mic Was Messed Up
The Commission on Presidential Debates reported on Friday that there were in fact issues with Donald Trumps microphone at the Debate Monday evening at Hofstra University in New York.
Following the debate, Trump told the press that they gave me a defective mic. Did you notice that? My mic was defective within the room, CNN reports. Trump posed the question: Was that on purpose?
While it may be too early to call it anything other than a technical malfunction, the Commission on Presidential Debates said there were issues regarding Donald Trumps audio that affected the sound level in the debate hall.
Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton responded to Trumps claim Monday evening saying anybody who complains about the microphone is not having a good night.
The press pool and CNN host Carol Costello could not contain their delight, howling and laughing as Clinton returned to the front of the plane.
Replies to: Funny how Hitlery was cracking wise about Trump complaining about his mic during their debate...
Did anyone watching the debate have trouble hearing
Donald?
I do believe that the point was/is that the Altec-Lansings, in the theater, were not producing sound
(no message)
watching on TV
(no message)
But of course, the mic was the full reason why he couldn't debate facts or policy.
Sniffle, sniffle
Or why every fat American woman hates his guts.
(no message)
When the NWO takes over, the fat American women will be the first ones on the spit.
How else are we going to depopulate the planet?
Of course the Dems and MSM cheated - it's what they do. Lester Holt also cheated.
(no message)
Trump wet shit the bed period. Stop with the excuses. He's just lousy at being presidential.
(no message)
No excuses, but facts are facts.
(no message)
However, far superior to his opponent.
(no message)
No, worse due to his unpredictability and overreaction to personal attacks.
(no message)
Right, she is very predictible. She lies and gets away with it and did not deal with personal attack
(no message)
Broken record.
(no message)
true dat. And he keeps getting more chances.
(no message)
If only you had one standard for both candidates
(no message)
I do. I've already said she was a criminal. Can't get much worse than that.
(no message)
How about reckless (server, Libya, Iraq), unhinged (Union shouting video)
and criminal?
Didn't see the shouting video, but the rest, oh yeah.
You do know that she loses to any even semi sane R?
Only the ones for open borders, if you consider that sane.
(no message)
He would beat her like a drum and out debate her.
Experienced both at the Fed and state levels.
Top finish: second in NH.
(no message)
Divided R field.
(no message)
Ever give Trump the same benefit of the doubt? Lib.
(no message)
Needs to deserve it which he doesn't. Fanboy.
(no message)
Belongs below.
(no message)
Has anyone asked for Kasich's opinion lately?
(no message)
Only a Non Hacker would whine about equipment. A Commander-in-Chief needs to adjust fire, and win.
(no message)
Trump is like Van Gorder. Unworkable schemes.
(no message)
Why shit on Van Gorder?
(no message)
Well it seems that our CIC is about to give insurers $2.5B, in an end-run around congress...
...to bail out his failed ACA.
What a poser and imposter he remains...
Barack Obama, who savaged the Bush administration over the 2008 bailouts, is planning on going out with . . . a massive bailout. Congress can and should put a stop to this nonsense. When the so-called Affordable Care Act was being debated, conservative critics predicted that it would ruin private insurance companies.
But the insurance companies largely supported the bill, at least after they were bought off with a provision, the risk corridors, that would spread profits and losses across the industry, in effect converting competing insurance companies into a national cartel. The Affordable Care act is, as predicted, ruining private insurers. In this case, we dont hate to say we told you so. We did, and you should have listened. But the insurance cartel has a problem: The risk corridors were supposed to protect insurers against large losses by imposing what amounts to a tax on unusually large profits, dividing up these so-called windfalls among insurance companies. This is a textbook progressive scheme, in that it is based on distrust of markets and competition (which progressives, who are intellectually stuck in the 19th century, believe to be wasteful and irrational), which it proposes to replace with government-managed corporate collusion why bother nationalizing health care when you can manage the finances of nominally private firms as though they were government agencies?
You can probably guess what went wrong with this ingenious plan: There werent nearly enough windfalls to cover the losses that Obamacare has imposed on insurers. In 2014, the risk-corridors scheme was able to cover only about 12 percent of the related losses. Congressional Republicans saw this coming from many miles away. While they did not have the power to stop Obamacare in its tracks the law passed in spite of unanimous Republican opposition they did have the wit to put in a few intelligent provisions, one of which, pressed by Senator Marco Rubio, requires that the risk-corridors fund be revenue-neutral, i.e., that it pay out in benefits no more than it collects in levies, thus preventing the program from being used as a general bailout fund for insurance companies. The insurance companies, of course, are none too happy about this state of affairs.
Reminding Americans that there is a reason we loathe insurance companies, they sued the federal government, arguing that they were owed a bailout in excess of the risk-corridor funds irrespective of the fact that the law explicitly forbids this. The Obama administration, to no ones surprise, agreed. Obamacare is not a failing health-insurance program; it is a failed health-insurance program, so ridden with exceptions, exemptions, political favoritism, cronyism, mismanagement, and wishful thinking that even Hillary Rodham Clinton doesnt really support it, arguing, as she does, for repealing one of the major taxes included in the Affordable Care Act to allow Democrats and their media cheerleaders to pretend that the program will not lead to larger deficits. Obamacare isnt a program at all, anymore, only an exercise in ad-hocracy, the point of which is to allow Barack Obama to ride his unicorn off into the sunset talking about how he reformed American health care even as it collapses into a shambles.
Because President Obama is prohibited by law from making risk-corridor payments out of general funds, he is simply knuckling under to the insurance industrys lawsuit without a fight and planning to fund this bailout out of funds set aside for legal settlements. This is dishonest, like practically everything about Obamacare, and it is probably illegal, like more than a few things about Obamacare, the ill-considered opinion of John Roberts notwithstanding. Republicans have sent the secretary of Health and Human Services a letter insisting that using judgment funds for a backdoor risk-corridor bailout is flatly illegal. They are correct, and should be prepared to take their case to court again if the Obama administration should make it necessary. Perhaps someone could remind Donald Trump that running against corporate bailouts is, historically, not a bad position for presidential candidates. Until then, it is up to Congress to continue the fight. Higher premiums and fewer choices for you, massive and, left unchecked, endless bailouts for politically connected insurance companies. Thats Obamacare.
We dont hate to say we told you so.
Like when Hillary came under direct sniper fire on that tarmac?
(no message)
Too bad they missed. I only say that because it never happened. Just more Lib BS.
(no message)
Please don't advocate violence against women. We Are . . . ND!
(no message)